Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 52305 

Accordingly, part 20 of title 28 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations is proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

PART 20—CRIMINAL JUSTICE 

INFORMATION SYSTEMS 

1. Revise the authority citation for 

part 20 to read as follows: 

Authority: 28 U.S.C. 534; 42 U.S.C. 

14614(c), 42 U.S.C. 14615; Pub. L. 92–544, 86 

Stat. 1115; 42 U.S.C. 3711, et seq.; Pub. L. 

99–169, 99 Stat. 1002, 1008–1011, as 

amended by Pub. L. 99–569, 100 Stat. 3190, 

3196; Pub. L. 101–410, 104 Stat. 890, as 

amended by Pub. L. 104–134, 110 Stat. 1321. 

2. Revise § 20.32 to read as follows: 

§ 20.32 Includable offenses. 

The III System and the FIRS shall 

maintain fingerprints and criminal 

history record information relating to 

adult and juvenile offenses submitted by 

criminal justice agencies for retention, 

consistent with the FBI’s capacity to 

collect and exchange such information, 

except where non-retention of such 

fingerprints is specified by the 

submitting agency. 

3. In the appendix to part 20 revise 

the discussion of § 20.32 to read as 

follows: 

Appendix to Part 20—Commentary on 

Selected Sections of the Regulations on 

Criminal History Record Information 

Systems 

* * * * * 

§ 20.32. This section requires the FBI to 

retain all fingerprints and criminal history 

record information relating to adult or 

juvenile serious offenses submitted for 

retention by a criminal justice agency and 

enables the FBI to retain all fingerprints and 

criminal history record information relating 

to adult or juvenile nonserious offenses 

submitted for retention by a contributing 

agency, consistent with the FBI’s authority to 

collect and exchange such information, as set 

out at 28 U.S.C. 534, except where nonretention of such fingerprints is specified by 

the submitting agency. The FBI is to 

implement this requirement consistent with 

the FBI’s capacity to collect and exchange 

such information. 

Dated: August 28, 2006. 

Paul J. McNulty, 

Acting Attorney General. 

[FR Doc. E6–14605 Filed 9–1–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 16 

RIN 1018–AT29 

Injurious Wildlife Species; Silver Carp 

(Hypophthalmichthys molitrix) and 

Largescale Silver Carp 

(Hypophthalmichthys harmandi) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of 

availability of environmental 

documents. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service proposes to add all forms 

(diploid and triploid) of live silver carp 

(Hypophthalmichthys molitrix), 

gametes, eggs, and hybrids; and all 

forms (diploid and triploid) of live 

largescale silver carp 

(Hypophthalmichthys harmandi), 

gametes, eggs, and hybrids to the list of 

injurious fish, mollusks, and 

crustaceans under the Lacey Act. This 

listing would have the effect of 

prohibiting the importation and 

interstate transportation of any live 

animal, gamete, viable egg, or hybrid of 

the silver carp and largescale silver 

carp, without a permit in limited 

circumstances. The best available 

information indicates that this action is 

necessary to protect the interests of 

human beings, and wildlife and wildlife 

resources, from the purposeful or 

accidental introduction and subsequent 

establishment of silver carp and 

largescale silver carp populations in 

ecosystems of the United States. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before November 6, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN number 1018–AT29, 

by any of the following methods: 

• E-mail: silvercarp@fws.gov. Include 

‘‘RIN number 1018–AT29’’ in the 

subject line of the message. See the 

Public Comments Solicited section 

below for file format and other 

information about electronic filing. 

• Fax: (703) 358–1800. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Chief, 

Branch of Invasive Species, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax 

Drive, Suite 322, Arlington, VA 22203. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

Regulatory Information Number (RIN) 

for this rulemaking. For detailed 

instructions on submitting comments 

and additional information on the 

rulemaking process, see the ‘‘Public 

Participation’’ heading of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin 

Williams, Branch of Invasive Species, at 

erin_williams@fws.gov, or (703) 358–

2034. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

In October 2002, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service) received a 

petition signed by 25 members of 

Congress representing the Great Lakes 

region to add bighead, silver, and black 

carp to the list of injurious wildlife 

under the Lacey Act (18 U.S.C. 42). A 

follow-up letter to the original petition 

had seven additional Legislator 

signatures that support the petition. The 

Service published a Federal Register 

notice of inquiry on silver carp (68 FR 

43482–43483, July 23, 2003) and 

provided a 60-day public comment 

period. We received 31 comments in 

total, but 12 of these did not address the 

issues raised in the notice of inquiry. 

We considered the information 

provided in the 19 relevant comments. 

Most of the comments supported the 

addition of silver carp to the list of 

injurious wildlife. One commenter 

noted that silver carp have no 

commercial value, but was concerned 

that listing would hinder control and 

management. One commenter asked us 

to delay listing until a risk assessment 

could be completed. Biological synopses 

and risk assessments were compiled for 

silver and largescale silver carp. 

Under the terms of the injurious 

wildlife provisions of the Lacey Act, the 

Secretary of the Interior is authorized to 

prohibit the importation and interstate 

transportation of species designated by 

the Secretary as injurious. Injurious 

wildlife are defined as those species and 

offspring and eggs that are injurious to 

wildlife and wildlife resources, to 

human beings, and to the interests of 

forestry, horticulture, or agriculture of 

the United States. Wild mammals, wild 

birds, fish, mollusks, crustaceans, 

amphibians, and reptiles are the only 

organisms that can be added to the 

injurious wildlife list. 

Species listed as injurious (including 

their gametes or eggs) may not be 

imported into the United States or 

transported between States, the District 

of Columbia, the Commonwealth of 

Puerto Rico, or any territory or 

possession of the United States by any 

means without a permit issued by the 

Service. Permits may be granted for the 

importation or transportation of 


erjones on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
52306 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

injurious wildlife and their offspring or 

eggs for bona fide scientific, medical, 

educational, or zoological purposes. A 

listing would not prohibit intrastate 

transport or possession of species 

within States, where not prohibited by 

the State. Any regulation pertaining to 

the use of species within States would 

continue to be the responsibility of each 

State. 

Public Participation 

Our practice is to make comments, 

including names and home addresses of 

respondents, available for public review 

during regular business hours. 

Individual respondents may request that 

we withhold their home address from 

the rulemaking record, which we will 

honor to the extent allowable by law. In 

some circumstances, we would 

withhold from the rulemaking record a 

respondent’s identity, as allowable by 

law. If you wish us to withhold your 

name and/or address, you must state 

this prominently at the beginning of 

your comment. However, we will not 

consider anonymous comments. We 

will make all submissions from 

organizations or businesses and from 

individuals identifying themselves as 

representatives or officials of 

organizations or businesses available for 

public inspection in their entirety. 

This proposed rule solicits economic, 

biological, or other information on 

adding all forms of live silver and 

largescale silver carp, and hybrids, to 

the list of injurious wildlife. The data 

will be used to determine if these 

species are a threat, or potential threat, 

to those interests of the United States 

delineated above, and thus warrant 

addition to the list of injurious fish in 

50 CFR 16.13. 

We are soliciting public comments 

and supporting data, to gain additional 

information, on this proposed rule to 

add all forms of live silver and 

largescale silver carp, gametes, eggs, and 

hybrids, to the list of injurious wildlife 

under the Lacey Act. We specifically 

seek comment on the following 

questions: 

(1) What regulations does your State 

have pertaining to the use, transport, 

and/or production of silver or largescale 

silver carp? 

(2) How many silver carp are 

currently in culture or used to control 

algae in ponds, in how many and which 

States? Please provide the number of 

silver carp, if any, permitted within 

each State. 

(3) What would it cost to eradicate 

silver carp or largescale silver carp 

individuals and/or populations, or 

similar nonnative populations, if found? 

(4) What are the costs of 

implementing propagation, recovery, 

and restoration programs for native fish 

or other native species? What Statelisted species would be impacted by the 

introduction of silver or largescale silver 

carp? 

(5) What is the economic value of 

commercial fisheries that have been or 

could be impacted by silver or 

largescale silver carp? 

(6) How many fishermen sell live 

silver carp? 

(7) What are the annual sales and 

landings for live and/or dead silver 

carp? What is the magnitude of the 

commercial market for live silver carp, 

if any? 

(8) What is the consumer surplus 

generated from fishing for native fish or 

fishing-related expenditures such as 

food, lodging, and equipment? What is 

the ex-vessel revenue from fishing for 

native fish that are more valuable than 

silver carp? 

(9) What is the economic value of 

baitfish industries in each State? How 

would the presence of wild silver carp 

affect baitfish imports or exports within 

a State? 

Description of the Proposed Rule 

The regulations contained in 50 CFR 

part 16 implement the Lacey Act as 

amended. Under the terms of that law, 

the Secretary of the Interior is 

authorized to prohibit by regulation 

certain activities involving wild 

mammals, wild birds, fish, mollusks, 

crustaceans, amphibians, reptiles, and 

the offspring or eggs of any of the 

foregoing that are injurious to human 

beings, to the interests of agriculture, 

horticulture, or forestry, or to the 

wildlife or wildlife resources of the 

United States. The lists of injurious 

wildlife species are at 50 CFR 16.11 to 

16.15. By adding all forms of live silver 

carp and largescale silver carp, gametes, 

eggs and hybrids to the list of injurious 

wildlife, their importation into the 

United States, and transportation 

between States, the District of Columbia, 

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or 

any territory or possession of the United 

States by any means whatsoever would 

be prohibited, except by permit for 

zoological, educational, medical, or 

scientific purposes (in accordance with 

permit regulations at 50 CFR 16.22), or 

by Federal agencies without a permit 

solely for their own use. Federal 

agencies who wish to import silver or 

largescale silver carp for their own use 

must file a written declaration with the 

District Director of Customs and the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Inspector 

at the port of entry. No live silver carp 

or largescale silver carp, progeny 

thereof, viable eggs or hybrids imported 

or transported under a permit could be 

sold, donated, traded, loaned, or 

transferred to any other person or 

institution unless such person or 

institution has a permit issued by the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The 

interstate transportation of all forms of 

live silver carp or largescale silver carp, 

gametes, viable eggs or hybrids 

currently held in the United States for 

any purpose would be prohibited 

without a permit. 

This action is being considered in 

order to protect the welfare and survival 

of native wildlife and wildlife resources 

and the health and welfare of human 

beings from the potential negative 

impacts of silver carp and largescale 

silver carp by adding them to the list of 

injurious wildlife and preventing their 

importation and interstate movement. 

Each State can regulate the 

transportation and possession of silver 

carp and largescale silver carp within its 

State boundaries, but States are not able 

to prohibit the importation into the 

United States or the interstate 

transportation of these species. If one 

State allows the use of either species, 

and if either species is introduced to 

natural waters that are connected to 

other States’ waterbodies, the silver or 

largescale silver carp could be 

introduced to a State that prohibits their 

use or possession, potentially impacting 

that State’s natural resources. Many 

States are asking the Federal 

Government to prohibit the importation 

and interstate transportation of silver 

carp and have submitted letters of 

support for the addition of silver carp to 

the list of injurious wildlife. They are 

concerned that interstate transportation, 

through trucking accidents or exchange 

of hauling water, could result in the 

introduction of silver carp into State 

waters where they do not exist and are 

prohibited by State law. In addition, 

they are concerned that if their 

importation into the United States is 

still allowed, silver carp could become 

established in new waterways where 

they do not currently exist through 

human movement. The evaluation of 

injuriousness follows the biology and 

natural history summary sections for 

each species. 

Silver Carp 

Biology and Natural History 

The commonly named silver carp 

belongs to the family Cyprinidae, with 

the species name of 

Hypophthalmichthys molitrix. The 

silver carp is a deep-bodied fish with 

scale counts typically ranging from 85 to 

108. Adult coloration is typically grayVerDate Aug<31>2005 13:27 Sep 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\05SEP1.SGM 05SEP1

erjones on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 52307 

black along its top with upper sides 

olive-green that grade to silver along its 

side and stomach. Fins are dark and 

without true spines. Large adults can 

reach over 1.2 meters (m) in length and 

50 kilograms (kg) in weight. The gill 

rakers of silver carp are unique and form 

a highly specialized filtering apparatus. 

The silver carp is a freshwater species 

that can live in slightly brackish waters. 

Silver carp occur naturally in a variety 

of freshwater habitats including large 

rivers and warm water ponds, lakes, and 

backwaters that receive flooding or are 

otherwise connected to large rivers. 

They also have been introduced to 

ponds, lakes, reservoirs, and canals 

where they grow well, but may not 

spawn and recruit without access to an 

appropriate riverine habitat. Silver carp 

usually occupy the upper and middle 

layers of the water column and are quite 

tolerant of broad water temperatures: 

from 4 °C to 40 °C. 

Silver carp can be distinguished from 

all native North American cyprinids, 

except the golden shiner, by the 

presence of a well-developed ventral 

keel. It can be distinguished from the 

golden shiner in having very small 

scales (lateral line scales 85–108) 

compared to the golden shiner (39–51). 

Silver carp have only four pharyngeal 

teeth per side in a single row while the 

golden shiner has five on each side in 

a single row. 

Small silver carp may resemble shad 

(Dorosoma species). Of the nine 

established nonindigenous cyprinids in 

the United States, the silver carp is most 

similar to bighead carp. The silver carp 

is also very similar to largescale silver 

carp, a species which is not known to 

be in the United States. 

Though they are considered a deep 

water, schooling species, in the 

Missouri River these fish generally stay 

between 1 and 5 m deep and are rarely 

observed on the surface until disturbed. 

Once disturbed, silver carp often swim 

rapidly near the surface creating a 

characteristic large wake and regularly 

jump out of the water, particularly in 

response to outboard motors. 

Hybrids 

Hybridization between closely related 

species of cyprinids (e.g., species of the 

genus Hypophthalmichthys) is not 

unusual. Silver carp are known to 

hybridize and to produce viable 

offspring with both bighead 

(Hypophthalmichthys nobilis) and 

largescale silver carps. Hybrids of silver 

and bighead carps are often used in 

aquaculture in other countries. Both 

crosses (bighead carp × silver carp and 

the reciprocal cross) are fertile. Hybrids 

of bighead and silver carps often 

strongly resemble one or the other of the 

parent species. 

Bighead carp x silver carp are 

common in parts of the United States 

and are likely to be the result of wild 

spawning, not escapement of artificially 

induced hybrids because neither silver 

carp nor the hybrids are known to be in 

use in aquaculture in the United States. 

Five percent of the adult 

Hypophthalmichthys caught in the 

lower Missouri River in 2004 were 

hybrids. Hybridization between closely 

related cyprinid fishes occurs most 

commonly where a species has been 

introduced; hybridization between 

cyprinids typically occurs when 

members of related species share similar 

spawning habitat, behavior, and season 

because of the loss of environmental 

cues that inhibit hybridization behavior. 

The presence of large numbers of wildspawned hybrids implies that bighead 

and silver carps often spawn in the 

same place at the same time in United 

States waters. Although there has been 

moderate success in artificially 

producing hybrids of 

Hypophthalmichthys spp. and common 

carp (Cyprinus carpio), the spawning 

locations and behaviors of the two 

genera are so different that production 

of wild hybrids would be unlikely. 

Habitat Use 

Silver carp in the Missouri River 

occupy primarily low-velocity water 1 

to 5 m deep in all months of the year 

and use low-velocity sections of 

Missouri River tributaries. Adult silver 

carp aggregate in pool habitats to 

overwinter. Preliminary research 

indicates that silver carp in the Missouri 

River are active in winter, with activity 

slowing at less than 4 °C and little 

movement occurring at temperatures 

below 2 °C. Silver carp used tributaries 

to larger rivers in the summer. 

Large lakes connected to rivers often 

serve as nursery areas for silver carp. 

Juvenile silver carp typically remain in 

backwater habitats whereas adults are 

typically found in main channels of 

rivers. There is limited data about the 

habitat use of juvenile silver carp in the 

United States because their 

introduction, spread and establishment 

is relatively recent and ongoing. Youngof-year silver carp were found in 

abundance in the backwaters of the 

middle Mississippi River, and juvenile 

silver carp were collected in lowvelocity and off-channel habitats in the 

Missouri, Mississippi, Wabash, and 

lower Ohio rivers. Young-of-year (<100 

millimeters (mm)) and juvenile (100–

500 mm) silver carp collected for the 

Long Term Resource Monitoring 

Program (LTRMP), of the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, were found in 

similar proportions between main 

channel borders, side channel borders, 

and contiguous backwaters. 

Reproduction and Growth 

The reproductive potential of silver 

carp is high and increases with body 

size. Estimates range from 145,000–

5,400,000 eggs for fish 3.18–12.1 kg. 

Eggs must be incubated in waters with 

fairly high ionic concentrations. Silver 

carp mature anywhere from 3–8 years, 

and males usually mature one year 

earlier than females. Silver carp use 

discrete spawning sites repeatedly. 

Silver carp usually spawn in the spring 

and early summer after a rise in water 

levels with water temperatures ranging 

from 18–26 °C, though larva has been 

collected from the lower Missouri River 

in late August to mid-September. Eggs 

are semi-buoyant, so spawning typically 

occurs in water of sufficient flow to 

keep the eggs from sinking to the bottom 

and dying. The same female may spawn 

twice during one growing season. There 

are indications of a prolonged spawning 

period, into late summer or early fall, in 

the United States. 

Silver carp can grow quickly: 20 to 30 

kg in 5 to 8 years, and survival of silver 

carp in some culture ponds was 91%. 

Water temperatures for maximum 

growth of silver carp are between 

24–34 °C. Silver carp are difficult to age, 

but have been reported to live 15–20+ 

years. 

Diet and Feeding Habits 

Silver carp are primarily 

phytoplanktivores, but are highly 

opportunistic, eating phytoplankton, 

zooplankton, bacteria and detritus. 

Silver carp will also bite on bread paste 

and dough balls used as bait. Silver carp 

can effectively filter and consume 

smaller particles than bighead carp. 

Their food consumption rate is high, but 

widely variable. Fry at the smallest size 

class consumed up to 140% of their 

body weight daily; 63 mg fingerlings 

consumed just more than 30% and 70–

166 mg fingerlings consumed 63% of 

their body weight. Adult silver carp 

have been shown to consume 8.8 kg of 

food per year, with 90% of the 

consumption occurring during the three 

warmest months of the year. In the 

Missouri River, silver carp sometimes 

had full guts at temperatures lower than 

4 °C. Studies consistently show that 

filter feeding by silver carp shifts the 

species composition of the 

phytoplankton community to smaller 

species. Silver carp consume 

zooplankton, especially when 

phytoplankton abundance is low. 

Studies also consistently show that the 


erjones on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
52308 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

presence of silver carp results in a 

zooplankton community dominated by 

smaller individuals. 

History of Introduction 

There are conflicting reports about the 

first importation of silver carp into the 

United States. One report said that 

silver carp were introduced in 1971 

from Taiwan for algae control in sewage 

lagoons. Another report stated that 

silver carp were introduced in 1972 

under an agreement of maintenance 

with the Arkansas Game and Fish 

Commission. A third citation said silver 

carp were introduced into Arkansas in 

1973 as a potential addition to fish 

production ponds. Regardless of the 

specific date, the major pathway for 

introduction of silver carp in the United 

States was importation for biological 

control of plankton in sewage lagoons 

and culture ponds. The pathway that 

led to presence of this species in open 

waters probably was escape from 

facilities. There is little, if any, current 

use of silver carp for algae control. 

Soon after importation, silver carp 

were used in research projects and 

stocked into wastewater treatment 

lagoons and impoundments in several 

States. In 1974 or 1975, silver carp were 

collected from Bayou Meto and the 

White River, Arkansas County, 

Arkansas. In January 1980, several silver 

carp were collected from Crooked Creek, 

northeastern Arkansas County, which 

flowed through two private fish 

hatcheries possessing silver carp. By 

1981, silver carp had been collected 

from the White, Arkansas, and 

Mississippi rivers in Arkansas. From 

there, they continued to spread through 

the Mississippi River Basin. Silver carp 

have been collected from the natural 

waters of 16 States and Puerto Rico. 

Silver carp are well established 

throughout much of the Mississippi 

River Basin, and its range appears to be 

expanding in that basin. 

Pathways of Introduction 

There are several potential pathways 

for further introductions of silver carp 

into additional water bodies that may 

spread existing populations of silver 

carp in the United States. One pathway 

is through the release of baitfishes 

contaminated with silver carp. Other 

potential pathways that would likely 

spread silver carp to new waterbodies in 

the United States include intentional 

release, ballast water release, spread by 

commercial fishing activities, and 

release or escape from livehaulers that 

support commercial fishing or release 

associated with the sale of the species 

in live food fish markets, regardless of 

whether the fish were cultured in fish 

farms or were caught live in the wild. 

Silver carp may be introduced and 

become established in new waterways 

beyond their current ranges through 

human use and movement. 

Uses 

Worldwide more silver carp are 

produced than any other species of 

freshwater fish; they are raised for food 

or stocked for fishing. Silver carp are 

not presently being cultured 

commercially for food in the United 

States and have been minimally 

cultured in the last 20 years. The ability 

of silver carp to effectively filter 

particles and reliance on phytoplankton 

for much of its diet has led to the use 

of silver carp as a biological control 

agent for phytoplankton. Silver carp 

have been studied as a potential tool for 

controlling excess nutrients in 

wastewater ponds, with mixed results. 

Native Range and Potential Range in the 

United States 

In Asia (China and Eastern Siberia), 

silver carp are native from about 54 °N 

southward to 21 °N. Most of North 

America falls within these latitudes. 

This fact, along with establishment of 

this species in countries with climates 

as tropical as Vietnam, as cold and arid 

as Afghanistan and Pakistan, and as 

temperate as Kyrgyzstan and Latvia, 

leads to the conclusion that climate 

alone in the United States should not 

limit distribution of silver carp. 

Silver carp are likely to become 

established in the Great Lakes, 

especially given their close proximity. 

There are 22 rivers flowing into Lakes 

Erie, Huron, Michigan, and Superior 

that are potential spawning sites for 

silver carp. The Genetic Algorithm for 

Rule-Set Prediction (GARP) niche 

modeling tool estimates that United 

States distribution of silver carp could 

highly likely include most of the 

Midwest and eastern U.S. waterways, 

including the Chesapeake Bay, and 

tributaries, and the Connecticut River 

system. Based on the GARP model, 

silver carp, if introduced, are likely to 

also establish in the Columbia River 

system in the Northwest and possibly in 

parts of the Colorado and Sacramento/ 

San Joaquin systems. 

Because food availability, predation, 

and competition are not known to limit 

populations of this species elsewhere, 

access to habitats required for successful 

reproduction (i.e., substantial lengths of 

flowing water) will play a large role in 

determining potential range of silver 

carp in American waters. Another factor 

that may limit the distribution of silver 

carp in the United States is the 

requirement to incubate eggs in waters 

with fairly high ionic concentrations. 

Largescale Silver Carp 

Biology and Natural History 

The commonly named largescale 

silver carp (or southern silver carp, 

Vietnamese carp, or Harmandi silver 

carp) belongs to the family Cyprinidae, 

with the species name of 

Hypophthalmichthys harmandi. 

The largescale silver carp is 

physically most similar to the silver 

carp, but does resemble bighead carp as 

well. The relatively larger scale size of 

the largescale silver carp is the most 

reliable characteristic to distinguish it 

from silver carp. The number of scales 

along the lateral line of the largescale 

silver carp range from 77 to 88 

compared to the silver carp with 85 to 

108. Scale rows above the lateral line in 

largescale silver carp range from 21 to 

23 compared to 29 to 30 in the silver 

carp. 

Because largescale silver carp remain 

deep in the water column during 

daylight hours and swim toward the 

surface at night to feed on plankton, 

they may be less prone to jumping than 

silver carp in response to sounds of boat 

engines during daytime. 

Hybrids 

Largescale silver carp are known to 

hybridize and to produce viable 

offspring with silver carp. In northern 

Vietnam, native largescale silver carp, 

introduced silver carp, and their hybrids 

are cultured together. Largescale silver 

carp grow faster than silver carp but 

hybrids do not grow as quickly as pure 

largescale silver carp. No additional 

information on polyculture of largescale 

silver carp with other fish species was 

found. Largescale and silver carp 

hybrids are tolerant of a temperate 

climate (ca. 42–46 °N). 

Habitat Use 

Largescale silver carp prefer slowmoving, plankton-rich open waters. 

This species is a nocturnal feeder and 

remains in deeper waters during 

daylight hours. Largescale silver carp is 

most closely related to silver carp, with 

which it hybridizes, therefore its 

salinity tolerance is probably similar to 

that of silver carp, which is a freshwater 

species that can live in slightly brackish 

waters. 

Reproduction and Growth 

The reproductive capability is 

expected to be similar to that of silver 

carp, though largescale silver carp reach 

sexual maturity at a younger age than 

silver carp. Females reach maturity in 2 

years and males in 1 year. Spawning 


erjones on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 52309 

typically occurs in rivers during rains or 

floods in May and June, although 

spawning may be postponed until midAugust. Because largescale silver carp 

and silver carp are closely related and 

hybridize, spawning requirements are 

likely similar. 

The mean growth rate is greater for 

largescale silver carp than for silver 

carp. No information was found on 

longevity of largescale silver carp, but 

silver carp can live 15–20+ years 

suggesting the possibility of a similar 

longevity in the closely related 

largescale silver carp. Some adults may 

weigh 20–30 kg. 

Diet and Feeding Habits 

Largescale silver carp feed on 

phytoplankton and prefer slow-moving, 

plankton-rich open waters. This species 

is a nocturnal feeder and remains in 

deeper waters during daylight hours. 

Because this species is most closely 

related to silver carp, their food and 

feeding habits are likely similar. 

Uses 

There is no indication that the 

largescale silver carp have been 

imported into or introduced into the 

open waters of United States. Largescale 

silver carp are considered the most 

important species for culture in 

Vietnam; the rapid growth and high fat 

content of this fish has made it an 

economically important species for 

food. Because this species is most 

closely related to silver carp, its 

potential effectiveness in controlling 

algae and its effect on excess nutrients 

in closed systems is possibly similar to 

that of silver carp. 

Native Range and Potential Range in the 

United States 

Largescale silver carp are native to 

fresh waters of northern Hainan Island, 

China, and the Red (Hong Ha) River of 

northern Vietnam. The native range of 

largescale silver carp is subtropical to 

tropical (21–22 °N), making it the 

southernmost fish of the genus. The 

species does not occur naturally on the 

Chinese mainland. 

Within its native range, largescale 

silver carp occur in subtropical to 

tropical climates. Therefore, should 

pure stock be introduced to U.S. waters, 

its potential range would likely be 

limited to subtropical waters such as 

those present in southern Florida, 

southern Texas, and Hawaii. Lack of 

access to suitable rivers for spawning in 

these areas may preclude successful 

spawning. Hybrids of largescale silver 

and silver carps, however, would be 

expected to tolerate temperate waters as 

they do in Kazakhstan at about 42–46 

°N. 

Factors That Contribute to 

Injuriousness for Silver Carp 

Introduction and Spread 

The major pathway for introduction of 

silver carp in the United States was 

importation for biological control of 

plankton in culture ponds and sewage 

lagoons. The pathway that led to the 

presence of this species in open waters 

of the United States was probably 

escape from these facilities. Subsequent 

escapes and the mixture of silver carp 

with other species that were stocked 

may have contributed to the expansion 

of the species’ range. 

Silver carp are difficult to handle and 

transport because of their propensity to 

jump and avoid being taken by seines. 

These attributes have resulted in little 

silver carp culture in the United States 

since 1985. Silver carp are not being 

cultured commercially at this time; 

however, should culture of silver carp 

resume, a potential pathway for 

introduction would be escape or release 

from a facility or during the transport 

and sale of live fish in retail markets. 

Other more likely pathways that may 

aid the spread of existing populations of 

silver carp include connected 

waterways, contamination of pondgrown baitfishes with silver carp, ballast 

water release, release or escape from 

livehaulers that support commercial 

fisheries, or spread by commercial 

fishers themselves. 

Wild silver carp are at risk of being 

spread when juveniles are collected by 

cast net for use as live baitfish. Silver 

carp juveniles are very similar in 

appearance to shad and anglers 

sometimes catch young silver carp and 

use them as live bait. Release of live bait 

has been identified as a source for more 

than 100 introductions of fishes beyond 

their natural range in the United States. 

Although adult and market-sized silver 

carp are fragile and do not survive 

collection and transport well, fingerling 

silver carp are less susceptible to 

mortality due to handling stress. 

Other potential pathways for further 

introductions of silver carp into the 

wild involve those associated with the 

sale of the species in live food fish 

markets. Silver carp, caught as bycatch, 

may be sold as fillets or to live fish 

markets. Another potential pathway is 

the intentional release of silver carp 

through prayer release (the ceremonial 

release of a fish in honor of the one that 

will be eaten). 

Silver carp have survived, become 

established in river systems, and have 

been reproducing in natural waters of 

the United States since at least 1995. 

Because silver carp can occupy lakes, 

there is serious concern that this species 

will further expand its range in the 

United States beyond riverine 

environments and into lake 

environments including the Great Lakes. 

In its native range, juveniles and adults 

are found in lakes and reservoirs. Silver 

carp may be capable of establishing 

reproducing populations in other major 

river systems, such as the Potomac/ 

Chesapeake, Columbia, and 

Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta. 

Hybrids 

Hybridization of silver carp with 

native fishes is not possible, but 

hybridization has occurred between 

silver carp and bighead carp (H. nobilis), 

a nonnative species also present in the 

Mississippi River basin, and between 

silver carp and largescale silver carp (H. 

harmandi). Hybridization may also be 

possible with grass carp. 

Potential Effects on Native Species 

Competition for food and habitat with 

other planktivorous fishes and with 

post-larvae and early juveniles of most 

native fishes is likely high. Since nearly 

all fishes are planktivorous as larvae 

and juveniles, it is highly likely that 

silver carp will adversely affect most 

native fishes in the Mississippi River 

and also the Great Lakes basins, if 

established. Silver carp will most likely 

affect native adults in the Mississippi 

River Basin, such as paddlefish 

(Polyodon spathula), bigmouth buffalo 

(Ictiobus cyprinellus), gizzard shad 

(Dorosoma cepedianum), the regionally 

abundant emerald shiner (Notropis 

atherinoides), and threadfin shad 

(Dorosoma petenens), particularly in 

waters where food may become limited. 

Paddlefish, native to the Mississippi 

River Basin and Gulf of Mexico river 

drainages from east Texas to Alabama, 

is a large river fish that has declined in 

abundance in recent years because of 

overharvest and habitat alteration. Like 

the silver carp, paddlefish use plankton 

as its primary food source, so silver carp 

or hybrids would directly compete with 

paddlefish for food throughout most of 

the paddlefish’s range. Other fish, such 

as the buffalos or shads, use both 

plankton and aquatic invertebrates as 

food. While these fishes are currently 

more common than paddlefish, they 

may be at risk if silver carp or silver x 

largescale silver carp hybrids or silver x 

bighead hybrids are able to establish 

and reduce plankton. Gizzard shad are 

a primary forage base for predacious 

fishes and important to the ecology of 

Midwestern rivers; thus, the potential 


erjones on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
52310 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

competition with silver carp in these 

waters is cause for concern. 

If silver carp negatively affect 

important planktivorous forage fishes 

such as the gizzard shad and emerald 

shiner, fishes and birds that prey on 

these species would likely also be 

negatively affected. Adult silver carp are 

too large to be preyed on by almost any 

native predator. Young silver carp have 

likely been incorporated into the diets 

of piscivorous birds and fishes to some 

degree, but the extent of this predation 

is not known. Ecosystem balance is 

likely to be modified if silver carp 

populations become large enough to 

dominate other planktivorous fish 

species. Silver carp will likely have 

major effects on nutrient cycling and 

may have adverse effects on primary 

productivity, which could alter food 

webs and ultimately alter nutrient and 

energy cycling in aquatic communities. 

The most likely negative effect would be 

an alteration of fish community 

structure through competition for food. 

Fishes and mussels that are determined 

to be candidates for listing under the 

Endangered Species Act would be at 

risk. 

Habitat Degradation 

There is low risk of silver carp 

causing direct habitat degradation and/ 

or destruction, although the presence of 

silver carp is sometimes associated with 

decreased water clarity, which may also 

impact benthic chemistry and 

community structure. The effect of these 

fishes on nutrients, sediment resuspension (which can stimulate 

plankton growth), and decreasing 

dissolved oxygen varies. Excrement 

from silver carp (which can equal their 

body weight in 10 days) has organically 

enriched lake bottoms and altered the 

benthic macroinvertebrate community 

structure. Once established, these fish 

are likely to cause shifts in the food web 

and compete with other 

zooplanktivorous fishes and fish larvae 

for food. Changes in the community 

structure towards smaller size plankton 

may have negative effects on fishes 

native to the United States that subsist 

on larger zooplankton. 

Potential Pathogens 

Many species of parasites and 

bacterial diseases occur in silver carp. 

The only viral disease agent of silver 

carp found in the literature is 

Rhabdovirus carpio, the causative agent 

for spring viraemia of carp (SVC), a 

systemic, acute, and highly contagious 

infection commonly occurring in the 

spring when water temperatures are 

below 18 °C. Silver carp are susceptible 

to many diseases caused by parasitic 

protozoans and trematodes and several 

crustaceans have also been reported 

from silver carp. 

Although there have been studies of 

disease-causing agents of silver carp, 

none have dealt with transfer of these 

pathogens to native fishes of the United 

States. Two parasites are a potential 

threat to native North American fishes, 

including cyprinids: Gill-damaging 

Lernaea cyprinacea, known as 

anchorworm (this parasite is also known 

to affect salmonids and eels), and 

Bothriocephalus acheilognathi, known 

as Asian carp tapeworm. The Asian carp 

tapeworm has infected native fishes of 

concern in five States: Arizona, 

Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and 

Utah. Silver carp are hosts of this 

parasite, but suffer minimal adverse 

effects from it. As hosts of this 

tapeworm, silver carp have the potential 

to spread it to native fishes beyond the 

five states listed above. This is a parasite 

that erodes mucus membranes and 

intestinal tissues, often leading to death 

of the host. 

Some disease-causing agents harbored 

by silver carp pose health risks to 

humans. The psychotropic pathogen 

Listeria monocytogenes has been found 

in market and fish farm samples of 

silver carp. Clostridium botulinum was 

found in 1.1% of fresh and smoked 

samples of silver carp from the 

Mazandaran Province in Iran. The 

toxigenic fungi Aspergillus flavus, 

Alternaria, Penicillium, and Fusarium 

were found from silver carp and from 

pond water in which they were raised 

at a fish farm in northern Iran. In 

addition, live Salmonella spp. can be 

found in silver carp for at least 14 days 

after transfer to clean water and silver 

carp, therefore, should be considered as 

a potential carrier for Salmonella (S. 

typhimumium). 

Potential Impacts to Threatened and 

Endangered Wildlife 

Adverse effects of silver carp on 

selected threatened and endangered 

freshwater mussels and fishes is likely 

to be moderate to high. There are 

currently 116 fishes and 70 mussels on 

the Federal List of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife. Based on habitat 

requirements, it appears that 40 fishes 

and 25 mussels currently on the list 

would likely be impacted by the 

introduction and establishment of silver 

carp. Habitat requirements, springs and 

small streams, of the remaining listed 

fishes and mussels would probably 

preclude any detectable effects as it is 

unlikely that silver carp could survive 

in such small bodies of water. 

Adverse effects of established 

populations of silver carp on 

endangered and threatened fishes and 

mussels would vary between the two 

groups. Adverse effects to fishes would 

most likely be through direct 

competition for food resources, 

particularly phytoplankton and, to a 

lesser extent, zooplankton, in the water 

column during the larval stage. Potential 

for direct predation and injury of 

drifting fertilized eggs and larvae of 

native fishes also exists. Mussels are 

also filter feeders but live partly or 

totally buried in the substrate. Their 

association with the benthic 

environment means that they would be 

less likely to be affected by filter-feeding 

silver carp. Nevertheless, changes in the 

fish community structure caused by 

silver carp are likely to have adverse 

effects on abundance and availability of 

host fishes required for mussel 

reproduction. Nutrient levels are a 

concern because there is evidence of 

overloading of nutrients in waters where 

silver carp have been introduced. Silver 

carp may consume too much of the food 

in the water and compete with native 

species for food. Excrement from silver 

carp has been found to increase levels 

of certain nutrients, some which cannot 

be consumed by other animals in the 

digested form or may be harmful, which 

may lead to a net decrease in food 

resources available. 

The likelihood that silver carp would 

have adverse effects on designated 

critical habitats of threatened and 

endangered species is significant. There 

are currently 60 species of fishes and 18 

mussels with designated critical habitat. 

Of the fishes and mussels with critical 

habitat, at least 26 inhabit lakes or 

reaches of streams large enough to 

support silver carp. 

In some habitats, silver carp can 

develop extremely large populations 

that would likely further imperil native 

fishes not currently on the Federal List 

of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. 

Large populations of silver carp are 

likely to alter the native fish community 

structure, resulting in decline of native 

mussels since many rely on native host 

fishes for reproduction. The fact that 

silver carp can become extremely 

abundant and reach a very large size (> 

1 m in length) in rivers, lakes, and 

reservoirs increases the probability of a 

negative impact on aquatic ecosystems 

they invade. 

Potential Control 

Due to the extensive established range 

of silver carp in the Mississippi River 

Basin, conventional control methods are 

not feasible to reduce established 

populations. The damage to ancillary 

fisheries resources through control 

measures would be substantial. Netting 


erjones on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 52311 

and electrofishing may be effective in 

reducing populations, but many nontarget fish species would also be killed 

where such control measures are used. 

Selective removal of silver carp is 

possible given their location in the 

water column, but water trawling could 

also remove other non-target fish such 

as paddlefish. 

Use of chemical treatments, such as 

rotenone, would be expensive, only 

locally effective, and would negatively 

affect all fishes and invertebrates, not 

just the target carp. Chemical treatment 

of the Mississippi River and other large 

rivers in the United States to control 

silver carp is not feasible, either 

logistically or economically, and would 

have a low likelihood of success. Even 

most nonlethal methods to prevent the 

spread of silver carp, such as electrical 

barriers or acoustic, physical, or bubble 

barriers, would negatively affect 

migratory native fishes. This effect 

might be minimized, if somewhat 

species-specific sonic barriers were 

developed. Treatment of ballast water in 

vessels moving from waters containing 

reproductive populations of silver carp 

to waters devoid of these fishes may 

become necessary. At present, there is 

no method known to substantially 

reduce established populations of silver 

carp. On the basis of presently available 

technology, eradication is not possible. 

Impacts to Humans 

Silver carp in the United States cause 

substantial impacts to the health and 

welfare of human beings that use 

waterways infested with silver carp. 

There are numerous reports of injuries 

to human beings and damage to boats 

and boating equipment because of the 

jumping habits of silver carp in the 

vicinity of moving motorized watercraft. 

Some reported injuries include cuts 

from fins, black eyes, broken bones, 

back injuries, and concussions. Silver 

carp also cause property damage 

including broken radios, depth finders, 

fishing equipment, and antennae. Some 

vessels have been fitted with a Plexiglas 

pilot’s cab as protection against jumping 

silver carp. 

Factors That Reduce or Remove 

Injuriousness for Silver Carp 

Control 

The large and growing range of silver 

carp in U.S. waterways makes chemical 

control of established populations 

highly unlikely, both physically and 

fiscally. Some control might be possible 

with massive fishing efforts. Justifying 

the expense of such efforts would 

require a large commercial demand, 

which does not currently exist, nor is 

likely given the jumping behavior of 

silver carp which makes fishing 

difficult. 

The ability to control spread of 

established populations depends on 

their access to open waterways and 

riverine habitat to spawn. Barriers may 

help control the spread of silver carp 

from the Mississippi River basin into 

the Great Lakes or other waterbodies. 

However, there are still several 

pathways by which silver carp from 

established populations in the 

Mississippi River Basin might be moved 

to new waterbodies, such as the 

Potomac River or Columbia River, and 

have the potential to become 

established. 

Recovery of Disturbed Sites 

Because the ability to eradicate this 

species is low, there is little likelihood 

for rehabilitation or recovery of 

ecosystems disturbed by this species. 

Additionally infested waterways allow 

connections to unpopulated sites. 

Utilizing sterile silver carp would do 

little to reduce or remove injuriousness 

as the present range of establishment in 

the Mississippi River Basin is too 

extensive for this option to reduce 

current silver carp populations in this 

area. The use of daughterless fish 

technology (introducing sterile males to 

produce unviable eggs) may reduce 

populations, but this would take many 

years before it would reduce numbers of 

fish where they currently exist. 

Research is being conducted on the use 

of pheromones to control carp, but it is 

years from demonstrating effectiveness 

in natural waters and mass production. 

These technologies might be useful to 

prevent establishment of silver carp in 

new areas. 

Potential Pathogens 

The potential for silver carp to infect 

native fishes with pathogens is largely 

unknown. Should such transfers prove 

viable, the ability and effectiveness to 

control these transfers to native fishes 

would be low. The Asian carp 

tapeworm, for which silver carp is a 

known host, has demonstrated potential 

to jump to native species of several 

orders in other nations and within U.S. 

waters. 

Potential Ecological Benefits for 

Introduction 

The ability of silver carp to effectively 

filter particles and reliance on 

phytoplankton for much of its diet led 

to research into their effectiveness as a 

biological control agent for 

phytoplankton in wastewater systems 

and other ponds. There is conflicting 

data concerning the benefit of using 

silver carp to control excess nutrients. 

Regardless of their effect on increasing 

or decreasing phytoplankton and 

zooplankton abundance, studies have 

consistently shown that filter feeding by 

silver carp shifts the species 

composition of these communities to 

smaller species. Silver carps’

effectiveness has also been shown to be 

greatly influenced by the design of the 

facility. 

Conclusion 

Because silver carp are likely to 

spread from their current established 

range to new waterbodies in the United 

States; are likely to compete with native 

species for food and habitat; are likely 

to have negative impacts on humans; are 

known to hybridize with bighead carp, 

a nonnative species also established in 

the United States; and because it would 

be difficult to eradicate, reduce large 

populations, or recover ecosystems 

disturbed by the species, the Service 

finds silver carp to be injurious to the 

interests of human beings and the 

wildlife and wildlife resources of the 

United States. 

Factors That Contribute to 

Injuriousness for Largescale Silver 

Carp 

Potential Introduction and Spread 

To our knowledge, the largescale 

silver carp has not been imported into 

the United States. Its growth rate is 

greater than that of silver carp, and the 

species reaches sexual maturity sooner 

than silver carp. In culture situations, 

introduced silver carp hybridized with 

largescale silver carp. The hybrids did 

not grow as quickly as largescale silver 

carp but exceeded the growth rate of 

silver carp. Largescale silver carp x 

silver carp hybrids were introduced in 

Kazakhstan where they became 

established. The climate of Kazakhstan 

is temperate; thus, largescale silver carp 

x silver carp hybrids are more coldtolerant than pure largescale silver carp. 

The faster growth rate of these hybrids 

than pure silver carp and the increased 

palatability of largescale silver carp 

compared to silver carp may 

conceivably stimulate interest in 

culturing either the hybrids or pure 

largescale silver carp in the United 

States. Because hybrids can tolerate 

temperate climates, they have the 

potential to be cultured in many 

southern States. Culture of pure 

largescale silver carp would probably 

require subtropical/tropical conditions. 

Escape from containment, as has 

happened with silver carp, would 

provide a pathway for release of 

largescale silver carp into natural 


erjones on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
52312 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

waters. Should this fish or its hybrids be 

released into natural waters, connected 

waterways would become a secondary 

pathway for spread. Because of the 

morphological similarity between this 

species and silver carp, stock 

contamination of silver carp by 

largescale silver carp is possible if 

imported from regions with populations 

of H. harmandi. Another possible 

introduction pathway, should largescale 

silver carp or their hybrids be imported 

for culture, would be sale of live 

individuals in food fish markets. 

Likelihood of spread of largescale 

silver carp, should they be introduced, 

would be high in subtropical/tropical 

waters of the United States, but only 

where river flows are sufficient to 

support spawning. Hybrid largescale 

silver carp x silver carp, however, 

would have high potential to live in 

much of the temperate United States. 

Because largescale silver carp can 

occupy reservoirs, they could also live 

in lakes. The same is likely true for 

hybrids. Young largescale silver carp or 

any hybrids captured by anglers for use 

as live bait would be a pathway that 

could lead to numerous future 

introductions of these species. 

Hybrids 

Hybridization with native fishes is not 

believed to be possible. Largescale silver 

carp can hybridize with silver carp and 

possibly bighead carp, both of which are 

present in U.S. waters. Hybrids of 

largescale silver carp are known to have 

survived and became established in 

Kazakhstan at a latitude of 

approximately 45 °N, a latitude that 

parallels the border between New York 

State and Ontario, Canada. Therefore, it 

can be assumed that these hybrids 

would be capable of surviving and 

probably establishing throughout much 

of the United States where suitable 

waters exist. 

Potential Effects on Native Species 

Largescale silver carp consume 

primarily planktonic food sources. It is 

unknown if largescale silver carp feed 

more heavily on phytoplankton than 

zooplankton, but their hybrids with 

silver carp would likely show a 

preference for phytoplankton. 

Largescale silver carp and hybrids are 

highly likely to compete for food with 

other planktivorous native fishes and 

with post-larvae and early juveniles of 

most native fishes should they become 

established in the United States. 

Fishes most likely to be affected are 

those species whose diet is 

predominantly plankton including 

paddlefish (Polyodon spathula), native 

to the Mississippi River Basin and Gulf 

of Mexico river drainages from east 

Texas to Alabama, buffalos (Ictiobus 

spp.), or shads (Dorosoma spp.). Given 

that these fish may already be 

competing with bighead and silver carps 

in some areas, the presence of largescale 

silver carp would increase food 

competition and increase the threat of 

negative impacts to native species. 

Potential for direct predation and 

injury of drifting fertilized eggs and 

larvae of fishes exists. Mussels are also 

filter feeders but live partly or totally 

buried in the substrate; they would be 

less likely to be affected by filter-feeding 

largescale silver carp or their hybrids. 

Largescale silver carp feed in the water 

column at night. Nevertheless, changes 

in the fish community structure caused 

by largescale silver carp or hybrids 

would likely have adverse effects on 

abundance and availability of host 

fishes required for mussel reproduction. 

There are other possible, but less 

likely, effects that will cascade through 

any aquatic ecosystem with an 

established population of largescale 

silver carp or their hybrids. Nutrient 

levels are a concern because there is 

evidence of overloading of nutrients in 

waters into which silver carp have been 

introduced, and the same may apply to 

largescale silver carp or their hybrids. 

Habitat competition would likely be 

low unless populations become 

significantly large. The potential of 

largescale silver and any hybrids to 

cause habitat degradation and/or 

destruction is low as is possible 

predation on native wildlife. 

Additional adverse impacts on native 

wildlife, wildlife resources, and 

ecosystem balance are likely few, except 

for fishes. Ecosystem balance would 

likely be modified if populations of 

largescale silver carp or their hybrids 

with silver carp become large enough to 

dominate planktivorous fish species. 

Because largescale silver carp may 

survive and become established and 

compete with native fishes, there is no 

acceptable escape or release threshold 

for largescale silver carp or their 

hybrids. 

Potential Pathogens 

The potential for largescale silver carp 

to transfer pathogens is largely 

unknown. No detailed studies of 

disease-causing agents of largescale 

silver carp have been found, but at least 

three trematode parasites (Dactylogyrus 

harmandi, D. hypophthalmichthys, D. 

chenthushenae) are known to infect 

largescale silver carp. Bighead, silver, 

grass, and black carps are known to host 

the Asian carp tapeworm 

(Bothriocephalus acheilognathi), but it 

is unknown whether largescale silver 

carp host this species. Since largescale 

silver carp are very similar to silver 

carp, they likely can host the Asian carp 

tapeworm. 

Potential Impacts to Threatened and 

Endangered Wildlife 

Adverse effects of largescale silver 

carp on selected threatened and 

endangered freshwater mussels and 

fishes would be expected to be moderate 

to high. There are currently 116 fishes 

and 70 mussels on the Federal List of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. 

Based on habitat requirements, it 

appears that 40 fishes and 25 mussels 

currently on the endangered or 

threatened species list would likely be 

impacted by the introduction and 

establishment of largescale silver carp. 

However, the habitat requirements, 

springs and small streams, of the 

remaining listed fishes and mussels 

would probably preclude any detectable 

effects as it is unlikely that largescale 

silver carp or their hybrids would 

survive in such small bodies of water. 

It is highly likely that largescale silver 

carp and particularly their hybrids with 

silver carp would have adverse effects 

on designated critical habitats of 

threatened and endangered species. 

There are currently 60 species of fishes 

and 18 mussels with designated critical 

habitat. At least 26 fishes and mussels 

with critical habitat inhabit lakes or 

reaches of streams large enough to 

support hybrids of largescale silver carp 

and silver carp. Largescale silver carp 

and their hybrids have the potential to 

alter food webs and ultimately alter 

nutrient and energy cycling in aquatic 

communities. The most likely effect 

would be an alteration of fish 

community structure through 

competition for food. Fishes and 

mussels that are determined to be 

candidates for listing under the 

Endangered Species Act would likewise 

be at risk. 

There is low likelihood that species 

may be placed in danger of extinction as 

a result of the introduction or 

establishment of largescale silver carp if 

only pure stock escaped and became 

established in subtropical/tropical 

waters in the United States. Yet, the 

potential exists for hybrids with silver 

carp to develop large populations that 

could further imperil native fishes not 

currently on the Federal List of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. 

Large populations of hybrids with silver 

carp would likely alter native fish 

community structures, ultimately 

resulting in decline of native mussels 

since many rely on native host fishes for 

reproduction. The fact that hybrids have 

the potential to become abundant and 


erjones on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 52313 

reach a very large size, > 1 m in length, 

in rivers, lakes, and reservoirs, increases 

the probability of a negative impact on 

aquatic ecosystems should largescale 

silver carp be introduced and become 

established. 

Potential Control 

Due to the potential range of 

establishment of hybrid largescale silver 

carp x silver carp in the United States, 

conventional control methods would 

not be feasible. The damage to ancillary 

fisheries resources through control 

measures would be substantial. Netting 

and electrofishing might be effective in 

reducing local populations of largescale 

silver carp, but they would also affect 

native fishes present in the area where 

such control measures are used. 

Similarly, use of chemical treatments 

would be expensive, only locally 

effective, and would negatively affect all 

fishes and invertebrates. Even most 

nonlethal methods to prevent the spread 

of largescale silver carp, such as 

electrical barriers or bubble curtains, 

would negatively affect migratory native 

fishes. At present, there is no method 

known to substantially reduce 

populations of established fishes in U.S. 

waterways. On the basis of presently 

available technology, eradication would 

not be possible. 

Potential Impacts to Humans 

The potential impact on the health 

and welfare of humans from largescale 

silver carp or any hybrids is unknown. 

If largescale silver x silver hybrids 

display the jumping behavior of pure 

silver carp, their potential to injure 

humans could be considerable. Impacts 

to agriculture, horticulture or forestry 

from largescale silver carp or hybrids 

are highly unlikely. 

Factors That Reduce or Remove 

Injuriousness for Largescale Silver 

Carp 

Detection and Response 

If largescale silver carp were 

introduced into U.S. waters, it is 

unlikely that the introduction would be 

discovered until the numbers were high 

enough to impact wildlife and wildlife 

resources. Widespread surveys of 

waterways are not conducted to 

establish species’ presence lists. Delay 

in discovery would limit the ability and 

effectiveness to rapidly respond to the 

introduction and prevent establishment. 

It is unlikely that hybrid largescale 

silver x silver carp could be eradicated 

from U.S. waterways, should they be 

introduced, unless they are found in 

unconnected waterbodies. 

Control 

If hybrid largescale silver x silver carp 

were to escape and become established 

in natural waters, management of 

established populations would be nearly 

impossible both physically and fiscally. 

Some control might be possible with 

massive fishing efforts using nets, but 

this would unlikely stem range 

expansion. There would have to be 

substantial commercial demand to 

justify the expense of such efforts. 

Chemicals or selective removal may 

be used to manage populations in 

localized areas. However, selective 

removal of largescale silver carp would 

be difficult because they remain in 

deeper waters during daylight hours 

when such removal efforts would 

probably occur. If largescale hybrids 

lack this behavior, then selective 

removal may be feasible in specific 

situations. Pheromones may be a viable 

option to limit spread; this possibility is 

under investigation for silver carp, and 

may have applicability to largescale 

silver carp and any hybrids. However, 

research into this control method is in 

early stages. 

It would be difficult to control the 

spread of largescale silver carp or any 

hybrids to new locations except, 

perhaps, by use of electric, acoustic, 

physical and other types of barriers. At 

present, there is no method known to 

substantially reduce populations of 

introduced fishes in U.S. waterways. On 

the basis of presently available 

technology, eradication would not be 

possible. 

Although there is no evidence that 

this species has been introduced or 

targeted for introduction into the United 

States, its affinities with silver carp 

indicate that should it or its hybrids 

with silver carp be introduced, abilities 

to eradicate, manage or control spread to 

new locations would likely be low. 

Therefore, rehabilitation or recovery of 

ecosystems disturbed by this species or 

its hybrids is unlikely. Introduction of 

largescale silver carp or its hybrids has 

no known potential ecological benefits. 

Because no evidence exists that 

largescale silver carp have been 

imported or released into U.S. waters, 

triploidy or induced sterility could 

potentially reduce or eliminate 

injuriousness. Nevertheless, these 

processes are likely to be costly, timeconsuming, and not 100% effective. 

Should this species be imported, it is 

likely that it would be placed in culture 

with other Asian carps including silver 

carp, a species with which the 

largescale silver carp can hybridize. 

Although the largescale silver carp is 

not known to hybridize with bighead 

carp, it is feasible because hybrids 

between silver and bighead carps are 

known. 

Recovery of Disturbed Sites 

Although there is no evidence that 

this species has been introduced or 

targeted for introduction into the U.S., 

its similarities with silver carp indicate 

that should it or its hybrids with silver 

carp be introduced, abilities to 

eradicate, manage or control spread to 

new locations would likely be low. 

Therefore, there would be little 

likelihood for rehabilitation or recovery 

of ecosystems disturbed by this species 

or its hybrids. 

Potential Pathogens 

The potential for largescale silver carp 

or largescale silver x silver carp hybrids 

to infect native fishes with pathogens is 

largely unknown. Should such transfers 

prove viable, ability and effectiveness to 

control the spread to native fishes 

would be low. 

Potential Ecological Benefits for 

Introduction 

There are no potential ecological 

benefits for introduction of largescale 

silver carp or its hybrids. 

Conclusion 

Because largescale silver carp are 

likely to escape or be released into the 

wild if imported to the United States; 

are likely to survive, become established 

and spread if escaped or released; are 

likely to compete with native species for 

food and habitat; have been shown to 

hybridize with silver carp, a nonnative 

species already established in the 

United States; hybrids with silver carp 

may display jumping behavior that 

could injure humans; and because it 

would be difficult to prevent, eradicate, 

reduce large populations, control spread 

to new locations or recover ecosystems 

disturbed by the species, the Service 

finds largescale silver carp to be 

injurious to the interests of human 

beings and the wildlife and wildlife 

resources of the United States. 

Required Determinations 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq.) 

This rule contains information 

collection activity for special use 

permits. The Fish and Wildlife Service 

has approval from the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) to 

collect information under OMB control 

number 1018–0093. This approval 

expires June 30, 2007. The Service may 

not conduct or sponsor, and a person is 

not required to respond to, a collection 


erjones on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
52314 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

of information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

(a) In accordance with the criteria in 

Executive Order 12866, OMB has 

designated this rule as a significant 

regulatory action. 

This rule would not have an annual 

economic effect of $100 million or more 

or adversely affect an economic sector, 

productivity, jobs, the environment, or 

other units of government. 

Costs Incurred 

Silver Carp 

We expect this proposed rule to have 

minimal costs. Silver carp are not 

cultured in the United States, nor do we 

believe that they are imported or 

exported. Currently, there are some 

commercial fisheries for silver carp in 

the Mississippi, Missouri, and Illinois 

rivers. Usually, commercial fishermen 

are catching silver carp as bycatch, 

which can account for up to 50 percent 

of the catch. Silver carp are not 

favorable because of their jumping 

habits and because they are less 

desirable by the consumer. In Missouri, 

many of the fishermen do not primarily 

target Asian carp (bighead and silver 

carp) because the price received is low 

($0.10–$0.15 per pound). Instead, they 

fish for bighead and silver carp when 

other species or opportunities are 

unavailable. Many fishermen do not 

distinguish between bighead carp and 

silver carp. 

Data for the silver carp fishery is 

limited. While Table 1 shows 

commercial fishery landings and value 

in Iowa and Illinois, we recognize that 

there may be landings in other States as 

well. Compared to the total commercial 

harvest and value, Asian carp 

represented 11 percent of landings and 

6 percent of value in 2003. Because 

Illinois does not distinguish between 

bighead carp and silver carp in its 

annual report, we are unable to 

determine the magnitude of silver carp 

landings for the entire area. For Iowa, 

silver carp represented less than 1 

percent of total landings. 

TABLE 1.—2003 COMMERCIAL FISHERY LANDINGS AND VALUE IN IOWA AND ILLINOIS

Illinois1 Iowa 2 3 Total 

Total Commercial Harvest (lbs) ................................................................................................... 6,385,473 2,242,997 8,628,470 

Asian Carp* .......................................................................................................................... 900,497 15,774 916,271 

Silver Carp ............................................................................................................................ ........................ 3,828 3,828 

Total Commercial Value ($) ......................................................................................................... $1,334,467 $496,765 $1,831,232 

Asian Carp* .......................................................................................................................... $99,055 $1,735 $100,790 

Silver Carp ............................................................................................................................ ........................ $421 $421 

*Asian carp includes bighead carp and silver carp. The value for Asian carp and silver carp in Iowa is based on the average $0.11/lb received, 

which is the same as Illinois. 1 Illinois Department of Natural Resources. 2005. 2003 Commercial Catch Report. Brighton, Illinois. 

2Personal communication, Gene Jones, Iowa Department of Natural Resources. 

3 Iowa Department of Natural Resources. 2003. Fisheries Management Section 2003 Completion Reports. Des Moines, Iowa. 

The majority of the silver carp catch 

is sold as round weight. In Illinois, 

fishermen can sell silver carp as long as 

they are not transported live once the 

fish are taken off the water. No impacts 

are expected to this market because 

silver carp are not delivered live to the 

processor. 

The market for live silver carp is 

unknown. Two live silver carp have 

been seen for sale in Toronto markets; 

it is unknown if live silver carp are 

being sold in United States markets. It 

is possible that silver carp are 

inadvertently shipped along with live 

bighead carp. However, most live 

haulers will not haul live silver carp 

because the fishes do not transport well. 

Furthermore, the consumer prefers 

bighead carp to silver carp. Because 

only sales of live silver carp would be 

regulated by this proposed rulemaking, 

we do not expect any impacts to 

commercial fishermen unless they are 

transporting live silver carp across State 

lines for processing. While the exact 

impact is unknown, we expect it to be 

minimal. 

Largescale Silver Carp 

There is no known use for largescale 

silver carp in the United States or 

import/export of the species into or 

from the United States. We do not know 

of any future plans to use largescale 

silver carp in the United States. 

Therefore, we do not expect the 

proposed rule to add largescale silver 

carp to the list of injurious wildlife to 

have any costs. 

Benefits Accrued 

Silver Carp 

Within several waters of the Midwest, 

silver carp comprise a large percentage 

of the commercial catch as bycatch 

(non-target species). This may be 

negatively impacting revenue for 

commercial fishermen because silver 

carp are not as valuable as the native 

species that are targeted. It is possible 

that silver carp populations would not 

become established in new watersheds 

(Columbia Basin, Chesapeake Basin, and 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta) with 

similar attributes as the Mississippi 

River Basin as a result of this 

rulemaking. Silver carp are likely to 

compete with native fish for food, 

causing declines in native fishes in the 

United States, particularly those that 

rely heavily on plankton as a food 

resource. 

With this proposed rule, we expect to 

delay and greatly decrease the risk of 

the establishment of silver carp 

populations in other U.S. watersheds. 

Thus, this proposed rule would protect 

native fish and the recreational and 

commercial fisheries associated with 

native fish. In terms of recreational 

fisheries, benefits would accrue due to 

(1) consumer surplus generated from 

fishing native fish and (2) fishingrelated expenditures such as food, 

lodging, and equipment. In terms of 

commercial fisheries, benefits would 

accrue due to the ex-vessel revenue 

from fishing native fish which are more 

valuable than silver carp. The timeline 

for when these benefits would accrue 

depends on the potential spread and 

impacts of silver carp. The extent of 

benefits to recreational and commercial 

fisheries is also unknown. 

Largescale Silver Carp 

There have been no reports that 

largescale silver carp are in the United 

States. However, native fish populations 

could decline if largescale silver carp 

were to establish populations in the 

United States. With this proposed rule, 

we expect to greatly reduce the risk of 

the introduction and establishment of 

largescale silver carp (or any hybrids) in 

U.S. watersheds. Thus, this proposed 

rule protects native fish and the 

recreational and commercial fisheries 


erjones on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 52315 

associated with native fish. In terms of 

recreational fisheries, benefits would 

accrue due to the continued (1) 

consumer surplus generated from 

fishing native fish and (2) fishingrelated expenditures such as food, 

lodging, and equipment. In terms of 

commercial fisheries, benefits would 

accrue due to the continued ex-vessel 

revenue from fishing native fish. The 

extent of benefits to recreational and 

commercial fisheries is also unknown 

because it depends on the introduction 

and subsequent establishment of 

largescale silver carp populations in the 

United States. 

(b) This proposed rule will not create 

inconsistencies with other Federal 

agencies’ actions. This rule pertains 

only to regulations promulgated by the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the 

Lacey Act. No other agencies are 

involved in these regulations. 

(c) This proposed rule would not 

materially affect entitlements, grants, 

user fees, loan programs, or the rights 

and obligations of their recipients. This 

proposed rule does not affect 

entitlement programs. This rule is 

aimed at regulating the importation and 

movement of nonindigenous species 

that have the potential to cause 

significant economic and other impacts 

on natural resources that are the trust 

responsibility of the Federal 

Government. 

(d) OMB has determined that this 

proposed rule raises novel legal or 

policy issues. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(as amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 

(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever a Federal 

agency publishes a notice of rulemaking 

for any proposed or final rule, it must 

prepare and make available for public 

comment a regulatory flexibility 

analysis that describes the effect of the 

rule on small entities (i.e., small 

businesses, small organizations, and 

small government jurisdictions) (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). However, no 

regulatory flexibility analysis is required 

if the head of an agency certifies that the 

rule would not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Thus, for a 

regulatory flexibility analysis to be 

required, impacts must exceed a 

threshold for ‘‘significant impact’’ and a 

threshold for a ‘‘substantial number of 

small entities.’’ See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). 

SBREFA amended the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act to require Federal 

agencies to provide a statement of the 

factual basis for certifying that a rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

This proposed rulemaking may 

impact a small number of fishermen 

selling live silver carp. The number of 

fishermen targeting silver carp is 

unknown. Because the market for live 

silver market is also unknown, we are 

unable to estimate the degree of impact 

of this rulemaking. We expect this 

proposed rulemaking to have a minimal 

effect on commercial fishermen selling 

live silver carp because many live 

haulers do not transport live silver carp. 

We do not expect this rulemaking to 

affect aquaculture because silver carp, 

largescale silver carp or any hybrids are 

not being cultured in the United States 

at this time. 

Many small businesses within the 

retail trade industry (such as hotels, gas 

stations, taxidermy shops, bait and 

tackle shops, etc.) may benefit from 

continued recreational fishing without 

impacts from silver carp, largescale 

silver carp, or any hybrids. Furthermore, 

small businesses associated with 

commercial fishing (fishermen, 

wholesalers, and retailers) would also 

benefit from continued commercial 

fishing without impacts from silver 

carp, largescale silver carp, or any 

hybrids. We do not know the extent to 

which these small businesses would 

continue to benefit. However, we expect 

this benefit to be distributed across 

various watersheds, and so we do not 

expect that the rule will have a 

significant economic effect (benefit) on 

a substantial number of small entities in 

any region or nationally. 

Therefore, we certify that this rule 

would not have a significant economic 

effect on a substantial number of small 

entities as defined under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). An 

initial/final Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis is not required. Accordingly, a 

Small Entity Compliance Guide is not 

required. No individual small industry 

within the United States will be 

significantly affected if live silver carp 

or largescale silver carp importation and 

interstate transportation are prohibited. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The rule is not a major rule under 

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

This rule: 

(a) Does not have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more. 

Silver carp is in limited commercial 

trade in the United States and primarily 

as fillets; the largescale silver carp is not 

known to be imported or present in the 

United States. Silver carp are likely to 

devastate many native fishery resources 

if it continues to spread in the United 

States. The largescale silver carp could 

devastate many native fishery resources 

if it is introduced to U.S. waterways. 

This rulemaking will protect the 

environment from the introduction and 

spread of non-native species and will 

indirectly work to sustain the economic 

benefits enjoyed by numerous small 

establishments connected with 

recreational and commercial fishing. 

(b) Will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions. 

(c) Does not have significant adverse 

effects on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

In accordance with the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et 

seq.), this rule does not impose an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector 

of more than $100 million per year. The 

rule would not prohibit intrastate 

transport or any use of silver carp or 

largescale silver carp within State 

boundaries. Any regulations adhering to 

the use of silver carp or largescale silver 

carp within individual States will be the 

responsibility of each State. The rule 

does not have a significant or unique 

effect on State, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. A 

statement containing the information 

required by the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act is not required. 

Takings 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12630, the rule does not have significant 

takings implications. A takings 

implication assessment is not required. 

This rule would not impose significant 

requirements or limitations on private 

property use. 

Federalism 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, the rule does not have significant 

Federalism effects. A Federalism 

assessment is not required. This rule 

would not have substantial direct effects 

on States, in the relationship between 

the Federal Government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, in 

accordance with Executive Order 13132, 

we determine that this rule does not 

have sufficient Federalism implications 

to warrant the preparation of a 

Federalism Assessment. 


erjones on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
52316 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

Civil Justice Reform 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12988, the Office of the Solicitor has 

determined that the rule does not 

unduly burden the judicial system and 

meets the requirements of sections 3(a) 

and 3(b)(2) of the Executive Order. The 

rule has been reviewed to eliminate 

drafting errors and ambiguity, was 

written to minimize litigation, provides 

a clear legal standard for affected 

conduct rather than a general standard, 

and promotes simplification and burden 

reduction. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

We have reviewed this rule in 

accordance with the criteria of the 

National Environmental Policy Act and 

the Departmental Manual in 516 DM. 

This action is being taken to protect the 

natural resources of the United States. 

Draft environmental assessments have 

been prepared for each species and are 

available for review by written request 

(see ADDRESSES section) or at our Web 

page at http://contaminants.fws.gov/ 

Issues/InvasiveSpecies.cfm. 

Adding silver carp and largescale 

silver carp to the list of injurious 

wildlife is intended to prevent their 

further introduction and establishment 

into natural waters of the United States 

in order to protect native fishes, the 

survival and welfare of wildlife and 

wildlife resources and the health and 

welfare of humans. Not listing silver 

carp as injurious may allow for an 

expansion of their use to States where 

they are not already found, thus 

increasing the risk of their escape and 

establishment in new areas due to 

accidental release and, perhaps, 

intentional release, which would likely 

threaten native fish, wildlife, and 

humans. Silver carp are established 

throughout much of the Mississippi 

River Basin. Releases of silver carp into 

natural waters of the United States are 

likely to occur again and the species is 

likely to become established in 

additional U.S. waterways, threatening 

native fish populations, wildlife, and 

wildlife resources dependent on 

phytoplankton, zooplankton, bacteria, 

and detritus, and impacting human 

health. 

Largescale silver carp are not known 

to be in the United States, but if 

introduced to natural waters, they 

would likely impact the welfare and 

survival of native fish and wildlife, as 

well as the health and welfare of 

humans. In addition, largescale silver 

carp are visually similar to silver carp 

and can readily hybridize with silver 

carp, so they would be difficult to 

distinguish from silver carp. 

Government-to-Government 

Relationship With Tribes 

In accordance with the President’s 

memorandum of April 29, 1994, 

‘‘Government-to-Government Relations 

with Native American Tribal 

Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive 

Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we have 

evaluated potential effects on Federally 

recognized Indian tribes and have 

determined that there are no potential 

effects. This rule involves the 

importation and interstate movement of 

all forms of live silver carp, largescale 

silver carp, gametes, eggs, and hybrids. 

We are unaware of trade in these species 

by Tribes. 

Effects on Energy 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 13211 on regulations 

that significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, and use. Executive Order 

13211 requires agencies to prepare 

Statements of Energy Effects when 

undertaking certain actions. This rule is 

not expected to affect energy supplies, 

distribution, and use. Therefore, this 

action is a not a significant energy 

action and no Statement of Energy 

Effects is required. 

Clarity of the Rule 

Executive Order 12866 requires each 

agency to write regulations that are easy 

to understand. We invite your 

comments on how to make this rule 

easier to understand including answers 

to questions such as the following: (1) 

Are the requirements in this rule clearly 

stated? (2) Does the rule contain 

technical language or jargon that 

interferes with the clarity? (3) Does the 

format of the rule (grouping and order 

of sections, use of headings, 

paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its 

clarity? (4) Is the description of the rule 

in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of the preamble helpful in 

understanding the rule? What else could 

we do to make the rule easier to 

understand? 

Send a copy of any written comments 

about how we could make this rule 

easier to understand to: Office of 

Regulatory Affairs, Department of the 

Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20240. You may 

also e-mail comments to 

Exsec@ios.doi.gov. 

References Cited 

A complete list of all references used 

in this rulemaking is available upon 

request from the Branch of Invasive 

Species (see the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section). 

Authority 

The Service is issuing this proposed 

rule under the authority of the Lacey 

Act (18 U.S.C. 42). 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 16 

Fish, Imports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation, Wildlife. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service proposes to amend part 16, 

subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: 

PART 16—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 16 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 18 U.S.C. 42. 

2. Amend § 16.13 as follows: 

a. By removing the word ‘‘and’’ at the 

end of paragraph (a)(2)(iii); 

b. By removing the period at the end 

of paragraph (a)(2)(iv)(BB) and adding in 

its place ‘‘; and’’; and 

c. By adding a new paragraph (a)(2)(v) 

to read as set forth below. 

§ 16.13 Importation of live or dead fish, 

mollusks, and crustaceans, or their eggs. 

(a) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(v) Live fish, gametes, viable eggs, or 

hybrids of the species silver carp, 

Hypophthalmichthys molitrix, or 

largescale silver carp, 

Hypophthalmichthys harmandi. 

* * * * * 

Dated: July 14, 2006. 

Matt Hogan, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks. 

[FR Doc. 06–7416 Filed 9–1–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


erjones on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS